[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-747?page=comments#action_36419 ]
Christopher G. Stach II commented on AMQ-747:
-
Whoops! Patch to the patch:
+double variance = randomNumberGenerator.nextBoolean() ?
+1
Releasing every couple weeks may be a BIT fast though. Perhaps if we
have that many outstanding bugs we should rethink how we do release
stabilisation?
On Jun 16, 2006, at 9:03 PM, Adrian Co wrote:
+1 Release ActiveMQ 4.0.1
Regards,
Adrian Co
Hiram Chirino wrote:
Since the 4.0
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-753?page=all ]
Jason Sherman updated AMQ-753:
--
Attachment: AMQ-753.patch
This patch will add a remote address property to the JMX connection view
exposing the client IP Address
On 6/17/06, Brian McCallister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
Releasing every couple weeks may be a BIT fast though. Perhaps if we
have that many outstanding bugs we should rethink how we do release
stabilisation?
I think part of the problem is that after a big release, folks pound
the software
Are the licenses displayed in the console in the about page (
http://localhost:8080/console/about.jsp ) meant to represent the whole
of Geronimo, or just the console?
Currently the licenses displayed there are a subset of those in
Geronimo's LICENSE.txt file.
John
On 6/17/06, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just wanted to pass a note that some of us are working on the
geronimo-cache which is a first-pass at clustering in the sandbox:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/geronimo-cache/
Its the beginning of a full replication
On 6/17/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to call for a freeze on the trunk directory layout, while we
attempt to merge the changes from the dead 1.2 and 2.2 branches.
Once we get merged, I'm cool with switching to the m2 layout, but it
will make life my life painful if
On 6/17/06, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey community,
I just wanted to pass a note that some of us are working on the
geronimo-cache which is a first-pass at clustering in the sandbox:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/geronimo-cache/
Its the beginning of a full
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMODEVTOOLS-58?page=comments#action_12416613
]
Nick Breen commented on GERONIMODEVTOOLS-58:
Environment:
Windows XP SP2
Sun J2SDK 1.4.2_12 and J2RE 1.4.2_12
Steps to reproduce:
Eclipse 3.1.2 build
Stefan Arentz wrote:
On 6/17/06, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey community,
I just wanted to pass a note that some of us are working on the
geronimo-cache which is a first-pass at clustering in the sandbox:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/geronimo-cache/
Its
Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 6/17/06, Jeff Genender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just wanted to pass a note that some of us are working on the
geronimo-cache which is a first-pass at clustering in the sandbox:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/sandbox/geronimo-cache/
Its the beginning
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
All,
I have created what I hope is the final release of Geronimo 1.1.
There has been a lot of work that has gone into this release (please
review the RELEASE-NOTES). Here are the final release candidates for
your review.
*DayTrader Application*
Hi,
The work on M2 build can not proceed, because with our current
naming scheme we have exceeded the windows file path length limit
(around 256). There is a pending RTC, which will alleviate this problem
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@geronimo.apache.org/msg23564.html
Here is the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevan Miller wrote:
In Ken's announcement of the change to the commit model, he stated
that a +1 to an RTC request means I have applied this patch and
tested it and found it good. Although a relaxation of this
interpretation has been
I'm developing my first Geronimo plugin and so far all goes well,
mostly thanks to all the great hints people are giving me here :-)
My workflow is this: write code, mvn package, deployer.jar redeploy
target/plugin.jar. This works most of the time, but what I see a lot
is that I'm running old
I haven't seen this before. Perhaps it would help to do mvn clean
package instead of mvn package to make sure you always have the
latest code in your JAR?
Thanks,
Aaron
On 6/17/06, Stefan Arentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm developing my first Geronimo plugin and so far all goes well,
On 6/17/06, Aaron Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't seen this before. Perhaps it would help to do mvn clean
package instead of mvn package to make sure you always have the
latest code in your JAR?
That is not going to make a difference, I know for sure that the jar
is up to date. I
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If that means things languish for weeks or months, then
that's what it means.
I don't think this is a good idea.
The RTC process (as Ken is describing it) has a number of side effects:
- Eliminates trust. I know say, David J has a
On 6/17/06, Stefan Arentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is not going to make a difference, I know for sure that the jar
is up to date. I checked that a couple of times already. I'll try to
investigate the Geronimo side next time it happens.
Can you post the full output of the redeploy command?
HI,
On 6/14/06, Aaron Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
Is this a vote for the patch or whas that a +1 on my last comment?
Anyways.. I want to recap where the vote on this RTC is at. After 12
days, we have:
+1 from me, but I'm not sure it should get counted since I didn't
apply the
public void doFail()
{
// TODO: What do we here? When is this called? Do we do cleanup here when
// doStart() failed somehwere half way and left things in an
unpredictable state?
}
:-)
S.
+1 to your comment, +1 to the patch. Let's get it in! :)
Thanks,
Aaron
On 6/17/06, Hiram Chirino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HI,
On 6/14/06, Aaron Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
Is this a vote for the patch or whas that a +1 on my last comment?
Anyways.. I want to recap where the
To clarify, I think David's comments are important, but I think the
patch should go in and then be adjusted further. I'd rather see
iterative development in 1.2 and more effort to make the patch right
the first time in 1.1.1. There's no reason we couldn't open David's
comments in a Jira when
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If that means things languish for weeks or months, then
that's what it means.
I don't think this is a good idea.
RTC means tested quality, not assumed quality. If
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
One way to compare CTR and RTC to each other:
o With CTR, the focus is on getting things done.
o With RTC, the focus is on getting things done *well*
and doing it together.
- --
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Ok.
That looks like 3 +1s now. Committing patch shortly. Thanks everybody!
On 6/17/06, Aaron Mulder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To clarify, I think David's comments are important, but I think the
patch should go in and then be adjusted further. I'd rather see
iterative development in 1.2 and
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RTC means that you can't unilaterally and arbitrarily do
things *without* discussion. Like, say, setting up a
non-project-sponsored .com site and pointing project code at
it without discussion.
Why are you so hung up on this? The
Move activemq gbean integration modules from ActiveMQ to Geronimo
-
Key: GERONIMO-2132
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2132
Project: Geronimo
Type: New Feature
Security: public
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2132?page=all ]
Hiram Chirino updated GERONIMO-2132:
Attachment: amq4.patch
Move activemq gbean integration modules from ActiveMQ to Geronimo
Message Groups disables server side JMS session pooling
---
Key: AMQ-758
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-758
Project: ActiveMQ
Type: Bug
Components: Broker
Versions: 4.0
Removed the gbean modules as they have moved to the Geronimo project source tree
Key: AMQ-759
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-759
Project: ActiveMQ
Type: Improvement
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-759?page=all ]
Hiram Chirino resolved AMQ-759:
---
Resolution: Fixed
done in svn rev 415036
Removed the gbean modules as they have moved to the Geronimo project source
tree
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RTC means that you can't unilaterally and arbitrarily do things
*without* discussion. Like, say, setting up a
non-project-sponsored .com site and pointing project
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RTC means tested quality, not assumed quality. If you
can't find people to test the quality of something, it
doesn't go in because the quality isn't assured.
I'm not sure where 'quality' requirement is coming from. I don't
think
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why are you so hung up on this?
Because you did it under CTR and claimed that RTC wouldn't
have made any difference.
What are you talking about? When did I claim anything about what RTC
would or wouldn't have changed?
CTR also
On Jun 17, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If that means things languish for weeks or months, then
that's what it means.
I don't think this is a
Hi Guys and Gals,
I just wanted to chime into this thread since the discussion is quite
lively right now. Obviously not being a commiter on the project directly
I don't really have a leg to stand on from a developer perspective, but
I do come from a user perspective having worked through
Is there a code quality issue in this community?
-David
On Jun 17, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If that means things languish for weeks or
many issue with network of brokers
--
Key: AMQ-760
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-760
Project: ActiveMQ
Type: Bug
Components: Broker
Versions: 4.0
Environment: XP, Active MQ 4.0, Lingo 1.1
--- Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 17, 2006, at 10:00 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size
wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aaron Mulder wrote:
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If that means things languish for weeks or
The noupa approach seems to be working, although
it's going to require changes to either or both of the
m1 and m2 xmlbeans plugins... still investigating.
thanks
david jencks
--- David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the pluggable jacc implementation
(GERONIMO-1563)
I've been working on
I don't really like listing any elements in the middle of our
schema. Then there's no way to tell what is valid or intended. Is
there any other possible way to make this work?
If not, I'd at least like to have a security-provider element that
holds the any so it's clear what the any is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Blevins wrote:
Is there a code quality issue in this community?
Not necessarily. There *does* appear to be an issue
with some people not wanting to abide by the requirements
of the RTC model.
- --
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar,
This is a great news!
The WADI community is also working on providing clustering capabilities
to Geonimo. The first-pass is still not yet checked-in and I expect to
have it checked it next week.
The implementation will provide:
* pluggable replication strategy;
* support of a large number of
On Jun 17, 2006, at 3:49 PM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Blevins wrote:
Is there a code quality issue in this community?
Not necessarily. There *does* appear to be an issue
with some people not wanting to abide by the requirements
of
45 matches
Mail list logo
